A cytokine storm is a hyperinflammatory state secondary to the excessive production of cytokines by a deregulated immune system. It manifests clinically as an influenza-like syndrome, which can be complicated by multi-organ failure and coagulopathy, leading, in the most severe cases, even to death. The term cytokine storm was first used in 1993 to describe the graft-versus-host disease following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. It was then reused to define the adverse syndromes secondary to the administration of immunostimulating agents, such as anti-CD28 antibodies or bioengineered immune cells, i.e., CAR T-cell therapy. Currently, the concept of cytokine storm has been better elucidated and extended to the pathogenesis of many other conditions, such as sepsis, autoinflammatory disease, primary and secondary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, and multicentric Castleman disease. Moreover, cytokine storm has recently emerged as a key aspect in the novel Coronavirus disease 2019, as affected patients show high levels of several key pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as IL-1, IL-2, IL-6, TNF-α, IFN-γ, IP-10, GM-CSF, MCP-1, and IL-10, some of which also correlate with disease severity. Therefore, since the onset of the pandemic, numerous agents have been tested in the effort to mitigate the cytokine storm in COVID-19 patients, some of which are effective in reducing mortality, especially in critically ill patients, and are now becoming standards of care, such as glucocorticoids or some cytokine inhibitors. However, the challenge is still far from being met, and other therapeutic strategies are being tested in the hope that we can eventually overcome the disease.

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) represents about 25% of deaths in clinical cardiology. The identification of risk factors for SCD is the philosopher's stone of cardiology and the identification of non-invasive markers of risk of SCD remains one of the most important goals for the scientific community.The aim of this review is to analyze the state of the art around the heart rate variability (HRV) as a predictor factor for SCD.HRV is probably the most analyzed index in cardiovascular risk stratification technical literature, therefore an important number of models and methods have been developed.Nowadays, low HRV has been shown to be independently predictive of increased mortality in post- myocardial infarction patients, heart failure patients, in contrast with the data of the general population.Contrariwise, the relationship between HRV and SCD has received scarce attention in low-risk cohorts. Furthermore, in general population the attributable risk is modest and the cost/benefit ratio is not always convenient.The HRV evaluation could become an important tool for health status in risks population, even though the use of HRV alone for risk stratification of SCD is limited and further studies are needed.

Epidural hematomas (EDHs) and subdural hematomas (SDHs), or so-called extra-axial bleedings, are common clinical entities after a traumatic brain injury (TBI). A forensic pathologist often analyzes cases of traumatic EDHs or SDHs due to road accidents, suicides, homicides, assaults, domestic or on-the-job accidents, and even in a medical responsibility scenario. The aim of this review is to give an overview of the published data in the medical literature, useful to forensic pathologists. We mainly focused on the data from the last 15 years, and considered the most updated protocols and diagnostic-therapeutic tools. This study reviews the epidemiology, outcome, and dating of extra-axial hematomas in the adult population; studies on the controversial interdural hematoma are also included.

Anabolic androgenic steroids and carcinogenicity focusing on Leydig cell: a literature review Anabolic androgenic steroids and carcinogenicity focusing on leydig cell. a literature review

Background: Healthcare systems represent complex organizations within which multiple factors (physical environment, human factor, technological devices, quality of care) interconnect to form a dense network whose imbalance is potentially able to compromise patient safety. In this scenario, the need for hospitals to expand reactive and proactive clinical risk management programs is easily understood, and artificial intelligence fits well in this context. This systematic review aims to investigate the state of the art regarding the impact of AI on clinical risk management processes. To simplify the analysis of the review outcomes and to motivate future standardized comparisons with any subsequent studies, the findings of the present review will be grouped according to the possibility of applying AI in the prevention of the different incident type groups as defined by the ICPS. Materials and Methods: On 3 November 2023, a systematic review of the literature according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines was carried out using the SCOPUS and Medline (via PubMed) databases. A total of 297 articles were identified. After the selection process, 36 articles were included in the present systematic review. Results and Discussion: The studies included in this review allowed for the identification of three main “incident type” domains: clinical process, healthcare-associated infection, and medication. Another relevant application of AI in clinical risk management concerns the topic of incident reporting. Conclusions: This review highlighted that AI can be applied transversely in various clinical contexts to enhance patient safety and facilitate the identification of errors. It appears to be a promising tool to improve clinical risk management, although its use requires human supervision and cannot completely replace human skills. To facilitate the analysis of the present review outcome and to enable comparison with future systematic reviews, it was deemed useful to refer to a pre-existing taxonomy for the identification of adverse events. However, the results of the present study highlighted the usefulness of AI not only for risk prevention in clinical practice, but also in improving the use of an essential risk identification tool, which is incident reporting. For this reason, the taxonomy of the areas of application of AI to clinical risk processes should include an additional class relating to risk identification and analysis tools. For this purpose, it was considered convenient to use ICPS classification.

(1) Background: The current outbreak of COVID-19 infection is an ongoing challenge and a major threat to public health that requires surveillance, prompt diagnosis, as well as research efforts to understand the viral pathogenesis. Despite this, to date, very few studies have been performed concerning autoptic specimens. Therefore, this study aimed: (i) to reiterate the importance of the autoptic examination, the only method able to precisely define the cause of death; (ii) to provide a complete post-mortem histological and immunohistochemical investigation pattern capable of diagnosing death from COVID-19 infection. (2) Methods: In this paper, the lung examination of two subjects who died from COVID-19 are discussed, comparing the obtained data with those of the control, a newborn who died from pneumonia in the same pandemic period. (3) Results: The results of the present study suggest that COVID-19 infection can cause different forms of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), due to diffuse alveolar damage and diffuse endothelial damage. Nevertheless, different patterns of cellular and cytokine expression are associated with anti-COVID-19 antibody positivity, compared to the control case. Moreover, in both case studies, it is interesting to note that COVID-19, ACE2 and FVIII positivity was detected in the same fields. (4) Conclusions: COVID-19 infection has been initially classified as exclusively interstitial pneumonia with varying degrees of severity. Subsequently, vascular biomarkers showed that it can also be considered a vascular disease. The data on Factor VIII discussed in this paper, although preliminary and limited in number, seem to suggest that the thrombogenicity of Sars-CoV2 infection might be linked to widespread endothelial damage. In this way, it would be very important to investigate the pro-coagulative substrate both in all subjects who died and in COVID-19 survivors. This is because it may be hypothesized that the different patterns with which the pathology is expressed could depend on different individual susceptibility to infection or a different personal genetic-clinical background. In light of these findings, it would be important to perform more post-mortem investigations in order to clarify all aspects of the vascular hypothesis in the COVID-19 infection.